HEFT Repository

Mortality risk in patients on hemodiafiltration versus hemodialysis: a 'real-world' comparison from the DOPPS.

Locatelli, Francesco and Karaboyas, Angelo and Pisoni, Ronald L and Robinson, Bruce M and Fort, Joan and Vanholder, Raymond and Rayner, Hugh C and Kleophas, Werner and Jacobson, Stefan H and Combe, Christian and Port, Friedrich K and Tentori, Francesca (2017) Mortality risk in patients on hemodiafiltration versus hemodialysis: a 'real-world' comparison from the DOPPS. Nephrology, dialysis, transplantation : official publication of the European Dialysis and Transplant Association - European Renal Association. ISSN 1460-2385.

Full text not available from this repository.
Official URL: https://academic.oup.com/ndt/advance-article/doi/1...

Abstract

Background

With its convective component, hemodiafiltration (HDF) provides better middle molecule clearance compared with hemodialysis (HD) and is postulated to improve survival. A previous analysis of Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (DOPPS) data in 1998-2001 found lower mortality rates for high replacement fluid volume HDF versus HD. Randomized controlled trials have not shown uniform survival advantage for HDF; in secondary (non-randomized) analyses, better outcomes were observed in patients receiving the highest convection volumes.

Methods

In a 'real-world' setting, we analyzed patients on dialysis >90 days from seven European countries in DOPPS Phases 4 and 5 (2009-15). Adjusted Cox regression was used to study HDF (versus HD) and mortality, overall and by replacement fluid volume.

Results

Among 8567 eligible patients, 2012 (23%) were on HDF, ranging from 42% in Sweden to 12% in Germany. Median follow-up was 1.5 years during which 1988 patients died. The adjusted mortality hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) was 1.14 (1.00-1.29) for any HDF versus HD and 1.08 (0.92-1.28) for HDF >20 L replacement fluid volume versus HD. Similar results were found for cardiovascular and infection-related mortality. In an additional analysis aiming to avoid treatment-by-indication bias, we did not observe lower mortality rates in facilities using more HDF (versus HD).

Conclusions

Our results do not support the notion that HDF provides superior patient survival. Further trials designed to test the effect of high-volume HDF (versus lower volume HDF versus HD) on clinical outcomes are needed to adequately inform clinical practices.

Item Type: Article
Subjects: WJ Urogenital system. Urology
Divisions: Emergency Services > Renal
Related URLs:
Depositing User: Mrs Yolande Brookes
Date Deposited: 22 Nov 2017 12:28
Last Modified: 22 Nov 2017 12:28
URI: http://www.repository.heartofengland.nhs.uk/id/eprint/1479

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item